文献检索文档翻译深度研究
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
邀请有礼套餐&价格历史记录

新学期,新优惠

限时优惠:9月1日-9月22日

30天高级会员仅需29元

1天体验卡首发特惠仅需5.99元

了解详情
不再提醒
插件&应用
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
高级版
套餐订阅购买积分包
AI 工具
文献检索文档翻译深度研究
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2025

国外质量保证/改进方法的影响是否有凭证?

[Is there a voucher for the impact of quality assurance/-improvement methods in foreign countries?].

作者信息

Simoes E, Boukamp K, Mayer E D, Schmahl F W

机构信息

Kompetenz-Centrum Qualitätssicherung/Qualitätsmanagement beim Medizinischen Dienst der Krankenversicherung Baden-Württemberg, Lahr.

出版信息

Gesundheitswesen. 2004 Jun;66(6):370-9. doi: 10.1055/s-2004-813230.


DOI:10.1055/s-2004-813230
PMID:15206040
Abstract

AIMS: Internationally, the implementation of diagnosis-related group systems has underlined the importance of quality assurance and improvement in health care systems. Support is expected by various concepts based on different theories and traditions. Published experience and knowledge of other countries with long-standing DRG systems and data in literature are studied to see whether there is an evidence-based impact of quality assurance and quality improvement on health care systems. METHODS: Relevant data was searched for in the Cochrane-database, the INAHTA-databases DARE, NHSEED and HTA, in DIMDI and the Medline-database of the NIH as well as generally in the internet, addressing the different countries. RESULTS: Several tools of quality assurance and quality improvement like accreditation, evidence-based medicine and guidelines exist in most of the 18 countries studied. Some of them, such as registries and audits, have marked national characteristics. Similar problems in provision of health care are reported internationally. There is broad consensus as to the aspects to be addressed in quality improvement concepts. Though international consensus on effective organization and methods of external assessment is growing there is only limited evidence for efficiency and general applicability of the different tools. Their cost impact, too, has not undergone systematic evaluation. Procedures like feedback strategies and reflection have been identified as having the potenzial to change the practice of health care professionals on a local level, but evidence for system-related impact is missing. Above all, for all concepts of quality improvement there is no real evidence of clinical benefit in the sense of better patient outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: None of the various tools for quality improvement in health care proves superior so far. It remains unclear which tool suits best for which intended improvement and in which context. Although quality improvement as a strategy meets with wide approval and appears to be a correct health policy, it remains doubtful whether it really improves clinical outcome and patient-centred health care. Public health research should address these questions. New concepts (e. g. integrating different tools of quality assurance and improvement or DMP systems) need evaluation prior to their broad implementation. Social medicine is called upon to mediate between the consented health care aims of society and medicine.

摘要

目的:在国际上,诊断相关分组系统的实施凸显了医疗保健系统中质量保证和质量改进的重要性。基于不同理论和传统的各种概念有望提供支持。研究其他拥有长期诊断相关分组系统的国家已发表的经验和知识以及文献中的数据,以查看质量保证和质量改进对医疗保健系统是否存在基于证据的影响。 方法:在考克兰数据库、INAHTA数据库DARE、NHSEED和HTA、DIMDI以及美国国立医学图书馆的Medline数据库中,以及在互联网上广泛搜索不同国家的相关数据。 结果:在所研究的18个国家中的大多数国家,存在几种质量保证和质量改进工具,如认证、循证医学和指南。其中一些工具,如登记册和审计,具有明显的国家特色。国际上报告了医疗保健提供方面的类似问题。在质量改进概念中需要解决的方面存在广泛共识。尽管国际上对有效组织和外部评估方法的共识在不断增加,但不同工具的效率和普遍适用性的证据有限。它们的成本影响也未经过系统评估。反馈策略和反思等程序已被确定有可能在地方层面改变医疗保健专业人员的做法,但缺乏与系统相关影响的证据。最重要的是,对于所有质量改进概念,从更好的患者结果意义上讲,没有真正的临床益处证据。 结论:到目前为止,医疗保健质量改进的各种工具都没有被证明更优越。目前尚不清楚哪种工具最适合哪种预期的改进以及在何种背景下使用。尽管质量改进作为一项策略得到广泛认可,并且似乎是一项正确的卫生政策,但它是否真的能改善临床结果和以患者为中心的医疗保健仍值得怀疑。公共卫生研究应解决这些问题。新的概念(例如整合不同的质量保证和改进工具或疾病管理计划系统)在广泛实施之前需要进行评估。社会医学需要在社会和医学共同认可的医疗保健目标之间进行协调。

相似文献

[1]
[Is there a voucher for the impact of quality assurance/-improvement methods in foreign countries?].

Gesundheitswesen. 2004-6

[2]
Procedures and methods of benefit assessments for medicines in Germany.

Eur J Health Econ. 2008-11

[3]
[Procedures and methods of benefit assessments for medicines in Germany].

Dtsch Med Wochenschr. 2008-12

[4]
[Health policy and occupational health: tools and methods to assure quality and appropriateness of interventions].

Med Lav. 2004

[5]
["Best practice" in health care--or why we need evidence-based medicine, guidelines and health technology assessment].

Z Arztl Fortbild Qualitatssich. 2000-10

[6]
The Vermont Oxford Network: evidence-based quality improvement for neonatology.

Pediatrics. 1999-1

[7]
Opioids and the management of chronic severe pain in the elderly: consensus statement of an International Expert Panel with focus on the six clinically most often used World Health Organization Step III opioids (buprenorphine, fentanyl, hydromorphone, methadone, morphine, oxycodone).

Pain Pract. 2008

[8]
Evidence-based medicine, systematic reviews, and guidelines in interventional pain management, part I: introduction and general considerations.

Pain Physician. 2008

[9]
Quality of acute stroke care improvement framework for the Paul Coverdell National Acute Stroke Registry: facilitating policy and system change at the hospital level.

Am J Prev Med. 2006-12

[10]
[Quality of health care, accreditation, and health technology assessment in Croatia: role of agency for quality and accreditation in health].

Acta Med Croatica. 2010-12

引用本文的文献

[1]
Immediate outcome indicators in perioperative care: a controlled intervention study on quality improvement in hospitals in Tanzania.

PLoS One. 2013-6-12

[2]
[The (non)sense of certification in intensive care medicine. The problem of the detection of suitable indicator systems].

Anaesthesist. 2009-1

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

推荐工具

医学文档翻译智能文献检索